White Horse Inn Blog

30 Comments on “WHI-1077 | Repentance & Personal Transformation”

1. Your Are The Idols Of Your Heart « A Rose by Any Other Name
   November 27th, 2011 at 7:05 pm

   [...] Repentance & Personal Transformation, White Horse Inn GA_googleAddAttr(“AdOpt”, “1″); GA_googleAddAttr(“Origin”, “other”); GA_googleAddAttr(“theme_bg”, “ffffff”); GA_googleAddAttr(“theme_text”, “333333″); GA_googleAddAttr(“theme_link”, “265e15″); GA_googleAddAttr(“theme_border”, “ededed”); GA_googleAddAttr(“theme_url”, “996633″); GA_googleAddAttr(“LangId”, “1″); GA_googleAddAttr(“Autotag”, “celebrities”); GA_googleAddAttr(“Autotag”, “religion”); GA_googleAddAttr(“Tag”, “idols”); GA_googleAddAttr(“Tag”, “total-depravity”); GA_googleAddAttr(“Tag”, “idolatry”); GA_googleAddAttr(“Tag”, “idols”); GA_googleAddAttr(“Tag”, “sin-nature”); GA_googleFillSlot(“wpcom_sharethrough”); Share this:StumbleUponDiggRedditMoreFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. [...]

2. 
   Merlin
   November 28th, 2011 at 5:20 am

   What is difficult about this discussion is that the reformation categories are lost. In your Justification essays, the introduction speaks of mono-covenantalism that has become the hallmark of the evangelical discussion. There is a replacement of justification with sanctification, and not even the reformation category of sanctification. It seems impossible to me to untwist the damage done by the set of assumptions that seem universal at this point, as the gospel doesn’t get a hearing any longer.

3. 
   Steven
   November 28th, 2011 at 6:23 pm

   I really like the White Horse Inn, and I enjoyed this episode, but it went against almost everything I’ve heard on this subject. Not that I think the WHI guys are wrong, I’m not sure what to think. As far as I know, respected teachers like John Piper, John MacArthur and Paul Washer teach that if you live in habitual sin it is a strong indication that you are unregenerate. Is anyone else familiar with that teaching? Until I heard this episode of WHI I thought that when John talks about believers not sinning he’s talking about habitual sin, but the WHI guys seem to strongly disagree with this. Is John mostly writing about the believer’s character or attitude of the heart? This is a subject that I’ve struggled with myself for several years. I don’t have much assurance at all. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

4. 
   Jim
   November 28th, 2011 at 9:02 pm

   Like Steven, I too do not know what to make of the discussion. Is there not such a thing as false conversion? If so, how is distinguished, if not by the fruit that it bears?
   Are there any outwardly manifested differences between the believer and the non-believer other than their regret over sin? And how do we know if it is godly sorrow or wordly sorrow?
   How would you know when to counsel someone as a believer, or witness to them as an un-believer, strictly by their profession alone?
   These are just a few questions that come to mind. Maybe I missed something by only hearing the 30 minute podcast.
   May I ask for more in depth conversation on this in a episode in the very near future? I really desire to understand.
   Thank you WHI for all you do for the body of Christ.

5. 
   Paula
   November 29th, 2011 at 6:10 am

   Superb. You folks who don’t ‘get’ this discussion have to understand that you cannot even begin to do good works until your consciences are freed from the fear of punishment. In a previous episode of WHI “The New Covenant”
   http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2011/09/25/whi-1068-the-new-covenant/
   Where one of them paraphrased a quote from Calvin, (which I couldn’t locate, but located something similar from WIlliam Romaine: ‎”There can be neither a true motive nor an energizing power to “be holy as he is holy” until the conscience is set free by totally accepting the satisfaction to the law Christ rendered in our place—as our substitute.”

   No one denies the truth of Romans 6. They even talked about it in this episode, as pastors, how we counsel people toward good behavior. But you don’t go beyond that to pronouncing a person saved or unsaved based on their struggle. Which one of us has moments where we DON’T want to hold on to certain sins, or who hold onto a sin in ignorance, believing it not to be a sin?

   Why is there such a drive to pronounce people saved or unsaved at all, especially based on their yet unperfected state? Give them the law (rightly divided – not law-light, aka steps to a better you) and then the FREE gospel, which is the answer to both the spiritual need of the saved and the spiritual need of the unsaved.

   The only way to inspire good works is by preaching the gospel… to point people to Christ, to show them how Christ has loved them. The only way to inspire love is to show them that they are loved and how much they are loved. Any person may yet reject that love or fail to fully grasp it, and in accordance, the person’s behavior will not be in accord with the will of the one expressing love toward that person. The only way to inspire works based on love for Christ, is to focus the person PRIMARILY on Christ and not on his or her own behavior.

   This whole thing seems to fly in the face of Jay Adams’ (Nouthetic) approach as well. I was over on his site a while ago looking at some articles which really rather sarcastically seemed to belittle this approach of gospel driven sanctification. Highly disappointing. And to read his own published poems and laments about his own remaining sinfulness made it even sadder.

6. 
   Paula
   November 29th, 2011 at 6:12 am

   I said “Which one of us has moments where we DON’T want to hold on to certain sins,”

   oops I meant “Which one of us DOESN’T have moments where we want to hold on to certain sins”

7. 
   Michael Horton
   November 29th, 2011 at 8:04 am

   Steven and Jim,

   There is a subtle but important difference between the Puritan and the Continental Reformed position on assurance. According to the former, faith does not include assurance; one is directed to look to Christ alone and be saved, but the assurance of that salvation may be lacking. The pastoral advice ranges widely, from “You wouldn’t even be worried about your salvation if you weren’t a believer” to “God has surely rejected you because of that sin you keep committing.” According to the latter, faith includes assurance in the very definition. To look to Christ IS to be assured of salvation in him.

   Proving our enduring attraction toward the law for our approval, many Christians in the wake of the Reformation shifted their anxiety from the quality of their works to the quality of their faith. “If we’re justified through faith alone, do I really believe?” Most of the leading Puritan pastors sought to comfort weak consciences, by directing them to Christ for justification, regardless of whether they experienced assurance. Yet this wedge between faith and assurance could also create a situation in which one trusted in Christ for justification, but spent his or her whole life searching for assurance through signs of sanctification. Aiming at comforting distraught consciences, the better Puritan ministers were eager to lead believers to discern the reality of their faith through the fruit of something tangible like receiving the Lord’s Supper with thanksgiving for Christ’s all-sufficient redemption. Others, aiming at separating the sheep from the goats, tortured consciences as mercilessly as any medieval priest or Anabaptist perfectionist. Some today who think they are following the Puritans on this question are actually closer to the Anabaptists.

   On exegetical grounds, I affirm the view stated in the Heidelberg Catechism Q. 21: “True faith is…a deep-rooted assurance, created in me by the Holy Spirit THROUGH THE GOSPEL that, out of sheer grace earned for us by Christ, not only others, but I too, have had my sins forgiven, have been made forever right with God, and have been granted salvation.”

   The fruit of faith may encourage us. Further, there are warnings that branches that do not bear fruit will be cut off of the covenantal vine.
   However, if that referred to continuing struggles with particular sins–even sinful habits–rather than an unrepentant and unbelieving stance, then why would Jesus contrast himself with the religious leaders by saying that he won’t put out a smoldering candle or break off a bruised reed? What pastoral counsel would some of us have given David just after a string of violent, selfish, and adulterous acts? Or to Peter after he had denied Christ three times? Or Paul’s acknowledgement that “For I do not do the good that I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing” (Rom 7:19)?

   The unregenerate may struggle with guilt, shame, or embarrassment. They may recognize that their vices may weaken their performance at work, their relationships, or ruin their reputation. They may even struggle with the wrong they inflicted on someone else. However, only the regenerate struggle with sin–that is, an offence against God, and hate it. Only the regenerate struggle with the paradox of being already justified and regenerate and yet find themselves giving in to temptation. Every regenerate believer is divorced from the law of sin and death and is married to Christ; agrees with God about sin and hates it, vowing to use everything in his or her God-given arsenal against it. However, that does not exclude the possibility of continuing struggles with sin–even the same sin–until Jesus raises us in glorified righteousness.

   It is not by looking within, to the quality of your faith and the fruit of your repentance, but by looking outside to the quality of Christ in his Gospel that the Spirit assures you of a saving union with him. And it is that assurance that bears fruit in the constant battle with sin. Assurance is not the reward that crowns our victory, but the gift of Christ’s victory to keep us going in our pilgrimage.

   It simply doesn’t matter how much one might insist upon justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone if final salvation depends ultimately on our sanctification. As the Belgic Confession explains regarding sanctification, “Moreover, though we do good works, we do not found our salvation upon them; for we can do no work but what is polluted by our flesh, and also punishable; and although we could perform such works, still the remembrance of one sin is sufficient to make God reject them.
   Thus, then, we would always be in doubt, tossed to and fro without any certainty, and our poor consciences would be continually vexed if they relied not on the merits of the suffering and death of our Savior” (Art. 24).

8. 
   Steven
   November 29th, 2011 at 10:45 am

   Paula and Michael,

   Thank you very much for your replies. I like your way of looking at assurance. I’ve been trying to believe for about 3 years but I have almost no assurance, as any fruit that I can see in my life is very far from perfect and is not consistently visible. I’ve been focusing on myself through this whole time and it simply hasn’t worked. I really like the idea of looking away from myself and to Jesus, but I find this hard to do. Can you give any pointers for looking to Jesus instead of myself? I really liked the quote from J. Gresham Machen a few weeks ago. Thank you very much!

9. 
   Steven Sherman
   November 30th, 2011 at 7:08 am

   Isn’t the thing to look for in habitual sin, the sinners attitude towards his sin ? Repentance IS a change of mind. If the sinner is NOT worried and grieved over his sin, then you should worry and grieve and pray for him. If the sinner IS worried and grieved over his sin, then that is a good indication of his salvation. Blessed are those who mourn for their sins; for they shall be comforted. Even Paul had problems “I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.”

10. 
    Bill
    November 30th, 2011 at 8:31 pm

    All I have to say is, wow! This has to rank among one of the best programs aired on the White Horse Inn. Believers are 100% sinners and 100% saints at the same time, as Luther called it Simul Justus et Peccator. Basically christians are saints inasmuch as they are forgiven sinners. Now this is a fundamental tenet of the faith, and it should help everybody remember that christians need the gospel and the forgiveness of sins preached every church service. The chruch needs to desparately go back to the business of preaching the forgiveness of sins. As a matter of fact, the church should get out of the business of personal transformation or changed lives that belongs solely in psychology and get into the business of administering grace. God instituted the preaching of the word and the administration of the sacraments (which are visible signs that point to the gospel and the forgiveness of sins) as the sole means of grace for the church to use. It is interesting that the catholic church, always knew better than today’s evangelicals what the mission of the church is. The church has one sole purpose, administering the means of grace. And catholics always knew it, unfortunately they perverted the Lord’s supper into the sacrifice of the mass, and before the Reformation decided to sell indulgences. But clearly they knew that the church was in the business of forgiving sins, and not personal transformation when they chose to sell indulgences instead of pop psychology programs. Now the forgiveness of sins is not truly a business, and indulgences ought not to be sold, since the forgiveness of sins is free for those that accept the gospel. That being said it is clear that the power of the keys was given to the church, and the church should exercise it properly by preaching the forgiveness of sins every Sunday and celebrating the Lord’s Supper in remembrance of Christ’s shed blood for the forgiveness of sins. This is the sole biblical mandate of the church, to proclaim grace through word and sacrament. Those are the means by which God operates and none other. God both justifies sinners and changes their heart (changed lives like evangelicals call it) exclusively by the preaching of grace through his word and the administration of the sacraments. Like the hosts of the White Horse Inn mention in this program, the law kills and makes man despair of his utterly lost condition, the spirit raises man up with Christ when the sinner is given hope by faith in the atoning sacrifice of God’s Son as a propitiation for his sins. This work of repentance and faith in Christ God works in the unbeliever at conversion and on the believer during the whole life because sin remains in the believer’s life until death. This baptism where we die to sin with Christ and are raised up with Him in newness of life is performed once, but the christian ought to be reminded of it his whole life as Paul also reminds believers in Romans 6 not to forget their baptism where they died to sin and were raised to life with Christ. And it is solely through this preaching of repentance and faith, and the administration of the sacraments that God justifies and changes life. All programs aimed at life transformation have no place in the church of Jesus Christ, God has dictated the method (preached word and sacraments), and it’s not up to man to devise any other method as if the grace of god flowing out of the word and sacrament were not amply sufficient.

11. The Sixth Sola: Justification By Sanctification By Self-will Alone « A Rose by Any Other Name
    December 1st, 2011 at 7:18 am

    [...] WHI-1077 | Repentance & Personal Transformation – White Horse Inn Blog. Michael Horton November 29th, 2011 at 8:04 am Steven and Jim, [...]

12. 
    TT
    December 2nd, 2011 at 6:16 am

    “It is not by looking within, to the quality of your faith and the fruit of your repentance, but by looking outside to the quality of Christ in his Gospel that the Spirit assures you of a saving union with him.?

    Just studied Van Drunen’s chapter in Justified… just saying. My study partner really locked on to the word extraspective. What liberty! Free, free at last, from the Last Idol in the Temple, self.

13. 
    Samuel
    December 3rd, 2011 at 10:53 am

    It’s sad they didn’t take 1 John 3:9 into discussion, because it seems to imply a Christian cannot commit habitual sin.

14. 
    sandra
    December 3rd, 2011 at 12:33 pm

    i like john piper and agree with most of what he says, but his saying “the faith that justifies also sanctifies” crushed my soul. i figure i am not very santified so i must not be justified either.

    i hope white horse inn makes more episodes like this!

15. 
    Merlin
    December 3rd, 2011 at 2:41 pm

    Samuel,
    How do you read the Bible? Borrowing from Dr. Riddlebarger, when you read the newspaper, do you turn to a middle page where a front page article has been continued, read two lines, and then assume you know what the whole story is about?

    That is what it is like to take 1 John 3 and start from that point. Read the whole letter from the beginning. It does help.

    Also, Bill’s point above is pertinent to your remark.

    Ask yourself this question: how can 1 John 1 (particularly verse 10) be true at the same time as 1 John 3:9? What do you make of the first three verses of 1 John 3? What does it mean to “abide” in Christ, and who can do it in this present evil Age?

    Either, through the Grace of God, the Blood of Christ is wholly sufficient for all who truly believe, or it isn’t. Either, through the Grace of God, the will of God trumps the will of man, or man is truly sovereign. Habitual sin seems to be exactly what Paul describes in Romans 7, is it not?

    I hope you have found this helpful, perhaps not in understanding just yet, but at least in finding a direction of inquiry that you might find more useful.

    And finally, while they may not have mentioned 1 John in this particular program, they have been through that particular passage before, late 2006 comes to mind.

    God Bless.

16. 
    Justin Stone
    December 5th, 2011 at 6:59 am

    Habitual sin should be a red flag. It should at least cause us to pause and think. And if led, by the reading of the Word, to examine ourselves and see if we’re truly in the faith, then we should do that.

    But at the same time, we shouldn’t make habitual sin the key indicator of true salvation. We should take a holistic approach to assurance which takes into account the whole counsel of God. But to speak of habitual sin in such a manner that it should never cause us to examine ourselves, and see if we’re truly in the faith, is unbiblical in my opinion.

17. 
    Paula
    December 6th, 2011 at 1:53 pm

    “Proving our enduring attraction toward the law for our approval, many Christians in the wake of the Reformation shifted their anxiety from the quality of their works to the quality of their faith. “If we’re justified through faith alone, do I really believe?” Most of the leading Puritan pastors sought to comfort weak consciences, by directing them to Christ for justification, regardless of whether they experienced assurance. Yet this wedge between faith and assurance could also create a situation in which one trusted in Christ for justification, but spent his or her whole life searching for assurance through signs of sanctification.”

    Exactly what I run into all the time. I used to participate in this myself, until recently. I thank people like you men on WHI for correcting this.

    So I would expect that you would not agree with pastors and teachers (or any Christian who calls himself Reformational) who says things like “Mortify sin – or stop calling yourself a Christian!” Correct?

18. 
    Paul
    December 9th, 2011 at 10:00 am

    Thank you for this episode. Within the past 3 years I have come out of 25+ years of conservative fundamentalist Christianity, to the right of what Michael Horton and Kim Riddlebarger describe in their past. The paradigm shift from seeing justification and sanctification as distinct processes to aspects of the work of God in my life has been, at times, monumental. This episode has helped that process more than any other I have heard. Thanks for all you do.

19. 
    steve
    December 13th, 2011 at 5:03 am

    I’d like to second Samuel’s comment. After listening to the episode, I heard several of the interviewed pastors reference 1 John in their remarks about continual sin being an indicator of something wrong. However, the hosts didn’t address 1 John in their answers.

    Merlin, I understand that you didn’t like how Samuel referenced a specific verse. However, I also don’t think Romans 7 should be taken out of context of the rest of the book. Specifically Romans 8, which is Paul explanation for what the Spirit does with those desires to “do what he doesn’t want to do” – he is a slave to the Spirit and kills the sin, right?

    Sorry to go over this again…Is there any time to be alarmed with a parishioner engaging in habitual sin?

20. 
    Merlin
    December 13th, 2011 at 4:10 pm

    Not at all, steve. No problem with disagreement on my part.

    I do not believe that I have taken Romans 7 out of context in the least. In fact, just the opposite, the context of Romans 7 is exactly within the whole letter what Luther calls simultaneously justified and sinner (paraphrased, of course.)

    This issue is really quite simple: is God Holy and is God sovereign? Was the resurrection wholly sufficient for our salvation or not? This isn’t rocket science and it comes straight out of the text. If we are going to include all of Romans, let’s try Romans 3 on for size. Verses 21-31 say that luckily there is a righteousness that is available apart from works that is a result of the propitiating work of Jesus on the Cross through His vicarious substitution. Does that section say that all sin except for sins x,y,z or habitual sin are covered by this other way? Does this righteousness apart from our own works desert us if we work more badly than others? What then do you make of Romans 3 1-20? No one does good, but some don’t do it habitually?

    There is an apparent lack of a two kingdom overview in this habitual sin view. Paul is saying that he is a full member through Christ in the Age to come, and as such, he is declared justified. At the same time, Paul is a full member of this present evil age, and as such, he will continue to be a sinner as long as his body remains in Adam. This it the same simultaneous situation as the dual natures of Christ, who is simultaneously wholly and Holy God at the same time He is wholly human. As the firstborn from the dead, he introduces the idea of this dual nature. Through Him, we are simultaneously justified and declared righteous, while remaining IN sin.

    Perhaps, the issue lies in understanding sin in terms of specific sins without keeping in mind the condition of sin.

    From the point of view of an individual engaging in a specific sin habitually, by all means reach out to him and try to help him amend his behavior. But this should never be couched in terms of a salvation issue. This is an issue of obedience, an area where all of us fall short.

    In Christ,
    Merlin

21. 
    Steven
    December 13th, 2011 at 9:47 pm

    I’m struggling with whether or not I really believe. I’ve heard lots of teaching from the Puritan perspective (ie – look for fruit in your life) but it’s only deepened the uncertainty. I’ve made progress with some external sins but I feel like my heart is totally rotten. Also, it seems like this view on assurance can very quickly make someone into a legalist/pharisee, or even produce false assurance if these “fruits” are just stirred up by self effort. What would someone from the Reformation perspective say to someone who doesn’t know if they really believe?

    Thank you,
    Steven

22. 
    Justin Stone
    December 14th, 2011 at 7:07 am

    Merlin,

    Are you saying habitual sin in a professing believes life should NEVER be couched as potentially an issue with the legitimacy of their salvation? If so, you would be saying that being brought under sins power should NEVER cause us to examine ourselves and see if we’re truly in the faith. Logically, that doesn’t seem to line up with what the Scriptures teach. Here’s why:

    -A good tree will bear good fruit, correct?
    -Will that good fruit be–at the minimum–what’s listed in Galatians?
    -Is self-control one of those fruits?
    -If yes, that fruit will be born in the genuine believer’s life, correct?
    -Therefore, if the fruit never shows up, why shouldn’t the examine themselves and see if they’re really in the faith?

    I’m not saying habitual sin is ALWAYS a salvation issue, but by taking self-examination in regard to salvation off the table could be taking one of the greatest tools the Bible gives us to gain POWER over habitual sin, namely, examining ourselves to see if we’re really in the faith will naturally drive us to the gospel where we will find power over sin.

    I think we should be careful here, and not ALWAYS couch it as a salvation issue, but we shouldn’t completely take that off the table, either. As the Spirit leads, we should utilize all the tools available to us in the Scriptures, and self-examination is one of them that helps people overcome habitual sin. I am one of them, as a former drug addict.

    Blessings,
    Justin

23. 
    Eric
    December 17th, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    As far as assurance goes the thing that I have found helpful when I have had doubts about my own salvation due to habitual sins has been what I think came from D. James Kennedy(paraphrasing): “If you were to die today, and stand before God and He asked why He should let you into heaven?” I could only plead on the blood of Christ. “Nothing in my hand I bring”(except my horrible sins)”, simply to the Cross I cling.”

    Determining a Christian from a non-Christian I think was alluded to in the program. The only basis we as fallen beleivers have to determine Christian/non-Christian is by their confession of faith. Does a person confess the biblical Christ as their Savior? Then, from the program, if they do, and they are unrepentant of sin, you give them the law to drive them to Christ. If they are repentant, then you give them the gospel to give them the power and strength to continue in their battle against sin.

    I too, have (and still am) struggled alot with 1 John, but I have to keep going back to the fact that there is nothing that can “separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” and “if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.”

24. 
    Justin Stone
    December 21st, 2011 at 8:22 am

    Eric,

    Your statement, “Determining a Christian from a non-Christian I think was alluded to in the program. The only basis we as fallen beleivers have to determine Christian/non-Christian is by their confession of faith.” seems to stand in stark contrast no only with 1 John, but also with the words of Jesus, who clearly said “you will KNOW them by their fruits,” not their confession.

    How do you counter this? Is there one verse anywhere in the Bible that says we should determine if someone is really a Christian by their profession of faith?

25. 
    Paula
    December 22nd, 2011 at 7:18 am

    One’s confession, I would think, is a fruit of the spirit. However you can make a false one, obviously. But if one is willing to confess Christ, then we counsel them as believers to live like a believer. No one is saying church discipline ought not to be applied. But more and more often I am running into people who chalk up differences in spiritual maturity or differences in communication style, or simply rubbing people the wrong way, is evidence of something that needs to undergo church discipline, or evidence that so and so is not mortifying their sin (at least not as well as the next guy). This holier than thou attitude is justified by resorting to law passages which say we must walk worthy of the hope to which we are called.

    Ok, in that case, which of us does that?

    In ANY case, if the person is a false convert, what will create a true convert? The law, or the gospel? Are we converted by hearing law?

26. 
    Justin Stone
    December 22nd, 2011 at 10:49 am

    Paula,

    I don’t think confession, in and of itself, is a fruit of the Spirit. I think faith is a fruit of the Spirit, and out of that fruit, someone can make a confession of faith that accurately represents their faith in Christ. But the confession itself is not a fruit of the Spirit, but rather, potentially points to the fruit of faith. I say potentially because not all confessions reflect true faith, as you pointed out.

    Regarding your “holier than thou” concerns, I do not see how they have any impact on the thrust of biblical passages that tell us how to interpret the legitimacy of confessions of faith, namely, how Scripture ties those confessions to fruit-bearing as a sign of there legitimacy.

    Your “holier than thou” concerns, in my opinion, only illustrate the need to thoughtfully approach this issue, and deal with applicable circumstances with utmost care and biblical sensitivity. We should not (and I’m not saying you’re suggesting this) throw our hands up in the air, declare passages like Matthew 7 and 1 John as “hard to understand”, and then lean to our own understanding when dealing with these contexts. No, we need to grow in our thoughtful application of Scripture, and not allow abuses (actual or perceived) to deter us from that endeavor.

    I think it would be akin to tossing out gender roles, since some men have abused their authority as husbands. If we followed that logic, we would just toss out gender roles altogether, since it can be/is abused. But we don’t do that, because we choose to remain faithful to Scripture.

    Regarding your last question, I think we’re converted by the supernatural regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, not necessarily the law/gospel, per se. You can preach the gospel all day to a dead man, but unless he is risen from the dead, he won’t hear you.

    Justin

27. 
    Paula
    December 22nd, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    “I don’t think confession, in and of itself, is a fruit of the Spirit. I think faith is a fruit of the Spirit, and out of that fruit, someone can make a confession of faith that accurately represents their faith in Christ. ”

    If you want to define it that way, then morality is also not a fruit of the Spirit.

    Heb 4:14 Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.

    “Your “holier than thou” concerns, in my opinion, only illustrate the need to thoughtfully approach this issue, and deal with applicable circumstances with utmost care and biblical sensitivity.”

    I would agree. The sensitivity toward the bruised reed (who sometimes is not very well displaying the fruit of the spirit) is what I am getting at. The WHI guys here offer a cool drink to those bruised reeds who are actually struggling daily to ‘walk worthy’, who are depressed and downcast because they are turned inward and told they ought to be looking at their walk for assurance of salvation. They are those who can’t seem to do a thing right, who, in their desire for truth, often step on toes or offend. For their griefs and efforts, those who are richly blessed with an even tempered personality, no warts, good looks and straight white teeth are very happy to point out their faults and tell them their souls might be in danger if they don’t get cracking on this sanctification thing.

    And the ‘nice people’ are the same ones, in my experience, who tend to take great issue with the idea of gospel sanctification. I’ve watched them do it to others and to myself. I’m far less concerned about myself than others who may be a little less… shall we say… assured of the truth.

    I think C S Lewis nailed it in his chapter in Mere Christianity, “nice people or new men” – if you leave out his inclusivist leanings which seem to be hinted at in one place during that chapter, the rest of the chapter is brilliant.

    “But if you are a poor creature–poisoned by a wretched upbringing in some house full of vulgar “There is either a warning or an encouragement here for every one of us. If you are a nice person – if virtue comes easily to you-beware! Much is expected from those to whom much is given. If you mistake for your own merits what are really God’s gifts to you through nature, and if you are contented with simply being nice, you are still a rebel: and all those gifts will only make your fall more terrible, your corruption more complicated, your bad example more disastrous. The Devil was an archangel once; his natural gifts were as far above yours as yours are above those of a chimpanzee.”

    “But if you are a poor creature- poisoned by a wretched upbringing in some house full of vulgar jealousies and senseless quarrels saddled, by no choice of your own, with some loathsome sexual, perversion- nagged day in and day out by an inferiority complex that makes you snap at your best friends-do not despair. He knows all about it. You are one of the poor whom He blessed. He knows what a wretched machine you are trying to drive. Keep on. Do what you can. One day (perhaps in another world, but perhaps far sooner than that) He will fling it on the scrap-heap and give you a new one. And then you may astonish us all-not least yourself: for you have learned your driving in a hard school. (Some of the last will be first and some of the first will be last.)”

    When I was very young I wanted so sincerely to be honoring to Christ. To some of my family I appear obsessed with how much effort I spend learning and the things I just don’t want to and never wanted to do because they were against God’s law. But how do I know my motivation isn’t because I realize going against God’s law is also painful for me, rather than just because it displeases God? My motivations are even imperfect. The more I look at myself, the more I would despair. I would rather look at the one who inspires love (We love because he first loved us) and let the love he inspires work as it will.

    To others who have the virtue thing figured out, I appear antinomian. But then, most good non-pietist Lutherans do. (I just found the “Weak on sanctification” Tshirt from New Reformation Press. Fabulous!~)

    Surely we ought to be striving to walk worthy. But the only time it becomes an issue (outside of blatant sins such as adultery and whatnot) is when we have a problem with someone who we don’t think is doing so (rarely ourselves!) who rubs us the wrong way, who speaks too strongly in defense of the truth for our tastes (i.e. someone stuck in the ‘cage stage’ for example), and we want to find reason to pronounce judgement on them or change them to make our lives, at least in dealing with them, easier.

    I would be hard pressed, for example, to consider someone like Rick Warren or Robert Schuller, or Joel Osteen a brother with whom I could have fellowship, in spite of their outward, nice, moral appearance. But by anyone’s yardstick those men certainly seem to display the fruit of the spirit. They do not clearly confess Christ, however.

28. 
    Eric
    December 28th, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    Justin,

    “Is there one verse anywhere in the Bible that says we should determine if someone is really a Christian by their profession of faith?”

    “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.” 1 John 4:1-3

    “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8

    Paul in his 1st letter the Corinthians addresses the Corinthians as “those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Then in chapter 3 says that he ”could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready, for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way?”
    I would certainly agree that we should strive to “walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called.” And in the case of gross unrepentant sins the church is even to “deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” (1 Cor. 5:5) I don’t see this as Paul judging this man not a Christian(although he certainly may not have been) but to take extreme measures to bring this man to repentance.

    The Bible certainly makes distinctions between Christians and non-Christians and those who are true Christians will make progress in sanctification over the course of their lifetimes. The New Testament teaches that there are many people in the visible church who are non-Christians. Here in America it is probably a fairly large number, maybe because we face no real persecution here. I suspect the holiness of the visible church would greatly increase if persecution against those who confess Christ made the church less appealing as a social club. The church then would maybe look closer to what 1 John describes.

29. 
    Eric
    December 28th, 2011 at 10:07 pm

    Oh, and hearing the gospel week in and week out wouldn’t hurt either!

30. 
    Ken Cook
    May 5th, 2012 at 10:00 pm

    Thank you guys for this powerful podcast. It really challenged some of my unjustified assumptions and interpretations of many biblical texts. To that end I would like to better understand how you would address 1 Corinthians 5:9ff. I believe that this can certainly fit most if not all of us, and when I look at v.13, it seems that all of us are worthy of being expelled from the church, and thus the body of Christ.

Leave a Reply